Section
IV:
Where
to
Go
From
Here ............................................................................................... 76
A.
Learn
the
Law
and
Get
Involved
in
Your
State .................................................................................................................. 76
B.
Change
the
Law
with
the
Alliance
for
Natural
Health
USA........................................................................................... 76

iii

Section
I:
Understanding
the
Law
A.
Introduction
Across
the
nation,
state
laws
and
regulations
are
not
adequately
protecting
practitioners’
due
process
rights
in
medical
board
disciplinary
proceedings.
This
pamphlet
and
checklist
are
created
specifically
for
licensed
medical
doctors
and
doctors
of
osteopathy
practicing
integrative
medicine,
or
the
combination
of
conventional
allopathic
medicine
with
complementary
and
alternative
(CAM)
treatments.
We
will
refer
to
these
types
of
licensed
physicians
as
“integrative
medical
practitioners”
(“IMP”).
State
medical
boards
will
usually
discipline
IMPs
in
one
of
two
ways:
(1)
unprofessional
conduct;
or
(2)
a
proxy
issue.
Unprofessional
conduct
varies
from
state
to
state,
but
generally
includes
such
offenses
as
sexual
misconduct,
conviction
of
a
felony,
and
substance
abuse.
It
also
generally
includes
a
failure
to
practice
medicine
in
an
acceptable
manner.
Because
some
boards
may
view
conventional
medicine
as
the
only
acceptable
manner
in
which
to
practice
medicine,
IMPs
are
at-­‐risk
of
disciplinary
actions.
A
proxy
issue
refers
to
a
violation
that
may
be
used
only
as
a
premise
upon
which
to
discipline
the
IP
for
his
or
her
practice
of
integrative
medicine.
Proxy
issues
may
include
poor
record
keeping
or
billing
disputes.
The
purpose
of
this
pamphlet
and
state
checklist
is
only
to
provide
you
with
a
general
sense
of
the
legal
protections,
or
lack
thereof,
in
your
state.
This
pamphlet
does
not
provide
legal
advice
and
should
not
be
relied
upon
when
you
are
learning
your
state’s
law.
Laws,
regulations,
and
policies
are
in
constant
flux
and
the
information
contained
here
may
not
reflect
the
most
recent
legal
information
for
your
state.
If
you
should
find
yourself
in
any
situation
described
in
our
corresponding
pamphlet,
What
Every
Practitioner
Needs
to
Know,
you
should
immediately
seek
the
advice
of
competent,
experienced
legal
counsel
familiar
with
dealing
with
your
medical
board
and
other
state
regulatory
agencies.
Don’t
make
any
statement
whatsoever
to
investigators
or
officials
without
the
presence
and
approval
of
a
lawyer.
This
is
the
number
one
mistake
innocent
physicians
make.
Before
examining
the
checklists,
it
is
necessary
that
you
review
the
following
information,
which
explains
each
topic
covered
in
the
checklist
and
why
it
is
included.
Although
our
checklist
is
not
exhaustive
and
more
of
a
“wish
list”
for
IMPs,
it
will
provide
you
with
a
general
overview
of
the
law
in
your
state.

1

B.
The
Medical
Board

As
explained
in
our
corresponding
pamphlet,
What
Every
Practitioner
Needs
to
Know,
professional
licensing
is
an
alleged
effort
to
ensure
professional
competence
and
to
protect
the
public
from
harm,
fraud,
and
deceit.
To
the
detriment
of
licensed
physicians,
however,
these
goals
are
often
lost
in
the
ineffectiveness
of
the
bureaucracy,
the
obvious
bias
toward
traditional
Western
medicine,
and
the
inherent
self-­‐serving
and
self-­‐preserving
nature
of
the
boards
and
agencies
involved
in
the
process.
Medical
boards
vary
from
state
to
state.
Some
boards
are
independent
and
some
part
of
a
larger
agency
(like
the
Department
of
Health).
Some
boards
hear
cases,
while
others
rely
upon
an
Administrative
Law
Judge.
Some
purposefully
seek
to
discipline
IMPs,
and
some
do
not.
Medical
board
discipline
is
the
greatest
legal
risk
for
IMPs.
Whether
a
medical
board
is
friendly
to
IMPs
depends
largely
upon
the
state’s
law
with
regard
to
CAM
therapies,
the
physician,
and
the
therapy
employed.
Board
membership
is
a
crucial
component
as
well.
For
example,
although
Texas
has
constitutional
and
regulatory
protections
for
health
freedom
and
the
practice
of
complementary
and
alternative
medicine,
certain
members
of
the
Texas
Medical
Board
have
a
history
of
targeting
and
punishing
integrative
medical
practitioners.
Each
state
has
its
own
“Medical
Practice
Act”
(MPA),
which
are
the
laws
governing
the
practice
of
medicine.
Medical
boards
will
also
develop
regulations
for
implementing
the
various
provisions
of
the
statutes,
in
addition
to
developing
its
own
policies,
statements,
or
guidelines
on
specific
areas
of
medicine.
National
organizations,
such
as
the
Federation
of
State
Medical
Boards,
generally
influence
the
shape
and
direction
of
the
regulatory
environment,
but
the
differences
between
state
laws
cannot
be
understated.
Again,
it
is
your
responsibility
to
know
the
law
in
your
state.
1.
The
Basics
The
first
three
lines
of
the
checklist
provide
you
with
a
general
overview
of
your
state
medical
board.
It
is
important
to
be
aware
of
the
size
and
composition
of
your
medical
board.
If
ever
investigated,
it
is
helpful
to
know
how
many
people
sit
on
the
board,
as
well
as
the
composition
of
practitioners
and
public
members,
as
these
people
will
ultimately
judge
your
fate.
It
is
also
helpful
to
know
which
health
care
practitioners
fall
under
the
jurisdiction
of
your
state
medical
board.
How
often
the
board
has
meetings
provides
insight
into
its
activity
level.
Key
to
Abbreviations:
AT-­‐athletic
trainer;
ACU-­‐acupuncturist;
ANA-­‐anesthetist
assistant;
AUD-­‐audiologist;
BLD-­‐biological
lab
director;
CP-­‐clinical
perfusionist;
CT-­‐cosmetic
therapist;
CHI-­‐
chiropractor;
CIS-­‐cardiovascular
invasive
specialist;
CPM-­‐certified
professional
midwife;
CPP-­‐clinical
pharmacist
practitioners;
DO-­‐osteopathic
physician;
DEH-­‐dental
hygienist;
DEI-­‐dietician;
ELE-­‐electrologist;
EMT-­‐emergency
medical
technician;
GC-­‐Genetic
counselors;
HAD-­‐hearing
aid
dispenser;
HYP-­‐hypnotherapist;
ICU-­‐mobile
intensive
care
unit;
LO-­‐licensed
orthotist;
LP-­‐licensed
perfusionist;
LPR-­‐licensed
prosthetist;
LPED-­‐
licensed
pedorthist;
MA-­‐medical
assistant;
MD-­‐allopathic
physician;
MDX-­‐MD
X-­‐rayoperator;
MP-­‐medical
physicist;
MR-­‐medical
resident;
MT-­‐massage
therapist;
MW-­‐
midwife;
NA-­‐nurse
anesthetist;
NAT-­‐ naturopath;
ND-­‐nutritionist;
NM-­‐nurse
midwife;
NP-­‐nurse
practitioner;
OT-­‐occupational
therapist;
OP-­‐optometrist;
OTA-­‐occupational
therapist
assistant;
ORT-­‐orthotist;
PA-­‐physician
assistant;
PER-­‐ perfusionist;
PT-­‐physical
therapist;
PTA-­‐physical
therapist
assistant;
POD-­‐podiatrist;
POL-­‐
2

polysomnograph
personnel;
POM-­‐Practitioner
Oriental
Medicine;
PRO-­‐prosthetist;
RA-­‐radiology
assistant;
RE-­‐
registered
electrologist;
RN-­‐registered
nurse;
RAT-­‐radiological
technologist;
RCP-­‐ respitory
care
practitioner;
RET-­‐respiratory
therapist;
RIT-­‐resident
in
training;
RTL-­‐radiological
technologists
limited;
RPA-­‐radiology
practitioner
assistant;
RRT-­‐radiological
technician;
SA-­‐surgical
assistant;
SL-­‐speech
language
pathologist;
SLA-­‐speech
language
pathologist
assistant;
SPA-­‐Specialist
Assistant
2.
Actively
Practicing
Board
Members
A
notable
concern
among
advocates
of
state
medical
board
reform
is
the
fact
that
some
states
do
not
require
board
members
to
actively
practice
medicine.
Without
this
qualification
for
membership,
boards
may
easily
be
composed
of
non-­‐practicing
physicians
–
academics,
professional
“experts,”
and
others
who
are
generally
unfamiliar
with
the
day-­‐in,
day-­‐out
of
seeing
and
treating
patients.
Because
the
medical
board
oversees
disciplinary
proceedings,
boards
should
be
composed
of
actively
practicing
physicians
familiar
with
patient
care
to
ensure
fairness
in
the
evaluation
of
the
IMP’s
treatment.
3.
Conflicts
of
Interest
By
and
large,
state
medical
board
qualifications
do
not
prohibit
board
members
from
having
general
conflicts
of
interest.
Qualifications
generally
fail
to
ask
whether
the
potential
board
member
has
family
members
licensed
and
under
the
jurisdiction
of
the
medical
board,
or
whether
the
potential
member
had
a
financial
interest
in
an
organization
adverse
to
licensed
physicians,
such
as
insurance
companies,
regulatory
agencies,
pharmaceutical
companies,
or
malpractice
attorneys.
This
should
be
a
basic
requirement
to
ensure
fairness
in
the
proceedings.

C.
The
Complaint
1.
Statute
of
Limitations
For
the
most
part,
state
medical
practice
acts
do
not
have
a
statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
against
physicians.
For
the
investigation
to
be
thorough
and
fair
to
all
parties,
the
board
should
require
the
complainant
file
the
complaint
within
so
many
years
(preferably
four
years)
of
the
alleged
incident.
Any
older
and
memories
begin
to
fade,
along
with
any
hope
of
fairness
in
the
proceedings.
2.
Anonymous
Complaints
Far
and
away
the
most
important
issue
facing
all
licensed
physicians
is
the
anonymous
complaint.
Many
states
permit
complainants
to
remain
anonymous
when
submitting
a
complaint
against
a
physician.
In
a
perfect
example
of
the
abuse
that
may
result
from
such
laws,
Dr.
Roberta
Kalfut,
former
president
of
the
Texas
State
Medical
Board,
had
her
husband
file
anonymous
complaints
against
all
of
her
competitors.
Once
summoned
before
her
at
the
medical
board,
she
effectively
eliminated
all
competition.
Insurance
companies
may
file
anonymous
complaints
to
avoid
reimbursing
a
physician
for
a
service.
Anonymous
complaints
are
a
grave
concern
and
threat
to
licensed
physicians,
especially
IMP’s.
In
our
checklist,
the
board
is
presumed
to
allow
anonymous
complaints
if
it
does
not
specifically
prohibit
them
in
statute,
regulation,
or
policy.

3

3.
Sworn
Complaints
The
state
medical
board
has
the
power
to
discipline
a
physician’s
license,
which
implies
the
board
has
the
power
to
hurt
a
physician’s
very
livelihood.
For
these
reasons,
many
medical
board
reform
advocates
would
like
to
limit
complaints
to
those
sworn
to
under
oath.
If
a
person
swears
to
the
truth
of
the
statements
contained
in
the
complaint,
we
are
less
likely
to
see
malicious,
biased,
and
anti-­‐competitive
complaints.
4.
Immunity
&
Malice
If
the
board
later
learns
the
complainant
filed
the
complaint
with
malice,
the
law
should
permit
the
physician
to
sue
that
person.
While
there
is
immunity
for
complaints
filed
in
good
faith,
there
should
be
no
immunity
for
those
complaints
filed
with
malicious
intent.
5.
Resolving
the
Dispute
Directly
with
the
Practitioner
A
few
states
require
the
medical
board’s
complaint
form
to
include
large,
simple
language
encouraging
the
complainant
to
first
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
physician
before
filing
the
complaint.
Many
physicians
are
business
people
and
respond
quickly
to
patients’
feedback
and
concerns.
By
encouraging
direct
resolution
first,
the
board
avoids
frivolous
complaints
that
would
likely
affect
the
physician’s
ability
to
practice
medicine.

D.
Notice

Notice
is
a
legal
concept
describing
the
requirement
that
a
party
be
made
aware
of
a
legal
proceeding
affecting
his
or
her
rights.
Here,
the
IMP
must
be
made
aware
of
disciplinary
investigations
and
hearings
that
will
affect
his
or
her
license
to
practice
medicine.
1.
Notice
is
by
a
Reasonable
Service
of
Process
Method
Service
of
process
is
the
manner
in
which
a
person
is
served
notice.
The
physician
must
be
served
in
a
reasonable
manner,
whether
through
personal
delivery
or
mail
to
the
last
address
of
record
with
the
board.
Although
this
may
seem
simple,
many
state
laws
and
regulations
fail
to
specify
how
the
board
should
serve
the
physician.
This
is
a
basic
procedural
due
process
right
owed
to
any
person
being
investigated
or
summoned
to
a
disciplinary
hearing.
All
medical
boards
should
address
it.
2.
Copy
of
the
Complaint
Notice
should
include
a
copy
of
the
complaint
filed
with
the
board.
Too
often,
physicians
are
served
notice
without
any
idea
of
what
they
did
wrong.
Some
medical
boards
require
the
board
include
a
statement
of
the
allegations
in
the
complaint.
However,
an
actual
copy
of
the
complaint
(free
of
redactions)
will
ensure
the
physician
is
provided
with
notice
of
the
incident
in
question,
the
patient,
and
the
relevant
files.
Clearly,
this
is
will
help
the
physician
better
defend
him
or
herself
against
the
charges.

4

3.
Time
to
Answer
Following
notice
and
a
receipt
of
a
copy
of
the
complaint,
the
board
should
provide
the
physician
with
a
reasonable
amount
of
time
to
submit
an
answer
to
the
complaint.
Allowing
little
or
no
time
to
answer
harms
the
physician’s
opportunity
to
defend
him
or
herself
against
the
allegations.
Giving
the
physician
15
days
to
answer
the
complaint
is
a
reasonable
amount
of
time
to
consult
an
attorney
and
submit
an
answer.
4.
Notice
in
Advance
of
a
Hearing
Notice
should
also
be
served
at
least
30
days
before
the
hearing
date.
Any
later
and
the
physician
does
not
have
adequate
time
to
consult
with
an
attorney
and
prepare
a
defense.
This
too
is
a
basic
right
that
the
state
laws
or
regulations
should
address.

E.
The
Investigation
1.
Peer
Review
IMPs
are
considerably
concerned
about
the
peer
review
process
in
disciplinary
investigations
and
proceedings.
It
is
imperative
–
especially
with
integrative
medical
practitioners
–
that
the
experts
evaluating
whether
the
physician
met
the
standard
of
care
practice
the
same
therapies
as
the
physician
under
review.
Medical
doctors
are
notoriously
biased
toward
conventional
Western
medicine.
If
given
the
opportunity,
some
may
find
the
use
or
incorporation
of
an
alternative
therapy
was
unprofessional
conduct,
even
when
there
was
little
risk
of
harm
or
no
actual
harm.
It
is
imperative
that
physicians
employing
the
same
therapies
review
the
IMP’s
medical
practice.
More
than
any
other
measure
argued
for
in
the
pamphlet,
this
would
dramatically
decrease
the
likelihood
of
IMPs
being
unjustly
prosecuted.
2.
Independent
Expert
Review
A
necessary
safeguard
in
assessing
the
standard
of
care
is
ensuring
there
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
practitioner’s
treatment.
Independent
review
will
lessen
the
chances
of
bias.
If
experts
reach
different
conclusions,
an
IMP
will
have
a
stronger
defense.
3.
Sharing
Expert
Information
Finally,
it
is
necessary
that
the
medical
board
share
its
expert
information
with
the
IMP
and
his
or
her
counsel.
Although
this
is
normally
required
in
civil
trials,
disciplinary
actions
by
regulatory
boards
are
a
different
matter.
This
provision
ought
to
be
included
in
the
state
medical
practice
act,
or
state
regulations.

F.
The
Hearing,
Decision,
&
Judicial
Review
1.
Clear
and
Convincing
Evidence
Ensuring
the
burden
on
the
medical
board
is
“clear
and
convincing
evidence”
is
critical
to
protecting
practitioners’
rights.
The
lesser
standard
of
“preponderance
of
the
evidence”
means
the
board
must
show
that
it
is
more
likely
than
not
that
the
practitioner
violated
a
provision
of
the
state’s
medical
practice
act.
This
standard
does
not
adequately
protect
practitioners,
whose
livelihoods
and
5

reputations
are
at
stake.
Because
the
medical
board
can
destroy
a
professional’s
livelihood
and
deprive
patients
of
a
practitioner,
it
is
essential
that
the
medical
board
demonstrate
unprofessional
conduct
through
clear
and
convincing
evidence.
2.
Demonstrating
the
Risk
of
Harm
Whenever
the
medical
board
is
seeking
disciplinary
action
against
a
practitioner’s
license,
it
is
essential
that
the
board
show
that
either
the
patient
was
actually
harmed,
or
that
the
risk
of
harm
outweighed
risks
associated
with
the
conventional
treatment.
Too
often,
practitioners’
licenses
are
disciplined
even
when
the
board
has
not
demonstrated
actual
harm
or
a
higher
risk
of
harm
than
the
conventional
treatment.
3.
Conflict
of
Interest
with
the
Practitioner
Clearly,
state
law
and
regulations
should
prohibit
a
board
member
from
participating
in
a
hearing
in
which
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner.
This
ensures
the
IMP
is
afforded
a
fair
and
impartial
hearing.
Unfortunately,
not
all
states
ensure
practitioners
are
provided
this
basic
right
in
disciplinary
hearings.
4.
Finding
the
Standard
of
Care:
CME
Credits
The
ACCME
(Accreditation
Council
for
Continuing
Medical
Education)
promotes
standards
of
care
through
continuing
medical
education
(CME)
credits.
If
the
ACCME
has
approved
credit
for
a
particular
therapy,
like
alternative
medicine,
then
that
therapy
should
be
considered
a
reasonable
standard
of
care.
5.
Proportional
Discipline
As
discussed
in
the
Introduction,
medical
boards
will
sometimes
target
practitioners
for
practicing
integrative
medicine,
but
use
a
proxy
issue
to
discipline
them.
For
example,
instead
of
disciplining
a
practitioner
for
recommending
the
patient
take
certain
vitamins
and
herbs,
the
board
will
discipline
him
or
her
for
poor
recordkeeping.
In
some
cases,
the
medical
board
has
levied
disproportional
disciplinary
action
for
minor
administrative
violations.
To
counter
such
unethical
actions
by
state
medical
boards,
the
law
should
require
the
disciplinary
actions
of
the
board
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense.
A
practitioner’s
license
should
never
be
revoked
for
poor
recordkeeping.
6.
The
Administrative
Judge
or
Review
Panel’s
Recommended
Action
In
some
states
(not
all),
an
administrative
judge
or
review
panel
will
review
the
evidence,
make
a
determination,
and
submit
a
recommended
action
to
the
medical
board.
In
some
states,
like
Texas
for
example,
the
medical
board
has
been
known
to
increase
the
punishment
beyond
what
the
review
panel
agreed
upon.
Unless
new
evidence
is
presented,
the
board
should
give
strong
consideration
and
deference
to
the
recommended
action
provided
by
the
administrative
judge
or
review
panel.
In
all
cases,
the
board
should
not
increase
the
punishment.

6

7.
Expunging
Dismissed
Actions
To
expunge
is
to
erase
or
destroy.
Dismissed
complaints
should
be
completely
expunged
from
a
practitioner’s
record.
Unfortunately,
some
states
keep
dismissed
actions
on
file
for
future
reference.
Some
states
even
make
the
information
public
for
a
number
of
years
after
the
dismissal.
A
dismissed
action
on
a
public
record
still
hurts
the
IMP’s
reputation
in
his
or
her
community.
Therefore,
it
is
imperative
that
dismissed
actions
are
completely
expunged
from
practitioners’
records.
8.
Meaningful
Judicial
Review
Although
states
allow
practitioners
to
appeal
the
board’s
disciplinary
decision,
the
courts
do
not
generally
have
the
power
to
reverse
that
decision
unless
it
is
found
“arbitrary
and
capricious.”
This
is
a
difficult
standard
of
review
to
meet
in
most
cases.
Instead,
the
law
should
provide
for
meaningful
judicial
review,
where
the
facts
and
the
law
are
reviewed
de
novo,
or
as
if
completely
new.
Such
judicial
review
would
deter
medical
boards
from
unjustly
disciplining
practitioners.

G.
Integrative
Medicine
1.
Unprofessional
Conduct
&
Integrative
Medicine
Some
states
have
included
a
provision,
in
either
law
or
regulation,
declaring
that
the
unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM.
While
this
sounds
great,
it
only
goes
so
far
in
protecting
integrative
medical
practitioners.
The
medical
board
may
still
say
the
use
or
incorporation
of
the
CAM
therapy
was
a
deviation
from
the
standard
of
care,
or
outside
the
licensee’s
scope
of
practice.
Furthermore,
they
may
still
go
after
the
practitioner
for
proxy
issues,
such
as
recordkeeping
and
billing
disputes.
Although
this
is
still
a
very
welcomed
provision
to
the
law,
it
falls
short
of
adequately
protecting
IMPs.
Example
text
of
the
law:
“A
physician
and
surgeon
shall
not
be
subject
to
discipline...solely
on
the
basis
that
the
treatment
or
advice
he
or
she
rendered
to
a
patient
is
alternative
or
complementary
medicine...”
Cal.
Bus.
&
Prof.
Code
§
2234.1(a)
(2009).

7

2.
Permission
to
Use
or
Incorporate
CAM
Therapies
Permission
to
use
or
incorporate
CAM
therapies
may
be
found
in
a
statute,
regulation,
or
a
statement
of
board
policy.
It
too
is
helpful
when
the
board
is
finding
the
standard
of
care
in
a
disciplinary
investigation
and
hearing.
For
example,
both
the
Arizona
Medical
Board
and
the
Kentucky
Board
of
Medical
Licensure
developed
model
guidelines
for
licensed
physicians
seeking
to
incorporate
or
use
CAM
therapies.
3.
Patient
Choice
in
Health
Care
Here
at
the
Alliance
for
Natural
Health
USA,
we
work
to
ensure
consumers
and
practitioners
have
a
right
to
choose
a
sustainable
and
preventative
approach
to
health,
along
with
nutritional
and
integrative
healthcare.
We
work
to
protect
consumers’
right
to
access
integrative
health
care,
and
practitioners’
right
to
practice
integrative
medicine.
To
accomplish
our
goals,
the
legislature
must
express
respect
for
patient
choice
that
is
consistent
with
principles
of
informed
consent.
4.
Informed
Consent
Informed
consent
is
critical
to
all
practicing
physicians,
regardless
of
the
therapy
employed.
However,
informed
consent
is
particularly
important
when
practicing
integrative
medicine.
Integrative
medical
practitioners
should
inform
patients
of
the
risks
and
benefits
of
both
conventional
and
non-­‐conventional
therapies.
If
the
physician
documents
evidence
of
the
patient’s
understanding
of
the
nature
of
the
risks
and
benefits
of
the
therapy,
as
well
as
the
patient’s
consent
to
the
integrative
medical
therapy,
unjust
prosecution
is
less
likely.
Example
text
of
a
law:
La.
Admin.
Code,
tit.
46,
pt.
XLV,
§
1707(A)(4)
“Informed
Consent.
A
physician
shall
inform
a
patient
or
his
guardian
of
each
of
the
following,
which
discussions
shall
be
noted
in
some
form
in
the
patient's
record:
a.
his
education,
experience,
and
credentials
regarding
any
integrative
or
complementary
medicine
which
is
recommended;
and
b.
the
risks
and
benefits
of
both
conventional
medicine
and
integrative
or
complementary
medicine
incorporated
within
each
treatment
plan.”

H.
Conclusion

We
hope
this
information
is
helpful
to
you
and
your
integrative
medical
practice
as
you
continue
to
learn
about
your
state’s
medical
board
and
the
laws
and
regulations
governing
the
practice
of
medicine
in
your
state.
This
information
should
not
be
relied
upon
as
legal
advice,
but
only
as
a
brief
introduction
to
your
state.
If
you
should
find
yourself
under
investigation
by
your
state’s
medical
board,
please
contact
a
competent
and
knowledgeable
attorney
familiar
with
handling
regulatory
agencies
in
your
state.
The
Alliance
for
Natural
Health
USA
can
help
point
you
in
the
right
direction.

8

Section
II:
Ranking
the
States
for
Integrative
Medical
Practitioners

A.
Introduction

No
state
has
the
perfect
medical
practice
act
or
the
perfect
state
medical
board
for
integrative
medical
practitioners.
Laws
are
created
by
legislatures,
which
are
full
of
imperfect
people.
Boards
are
also
full
of
imperfect
people
–
sometimes
with
a
bias
for
conventional
Western
medicine.
Board
membership,
for
example,
plays
a
significant
role
in
whether
or
not
the
board
is
friendly
to
integrative
medical
practitioners.
If
the
medical
board
is
composed
of
members
hostile
to
integrative
medicine,
then
those
members
will
find
reasons
to
discipline
an
IMP’s
license,
even
when
there
seem
to
be
protections
in
the
law
for
complementary
and
alternative
medicine.
If
medical
board
members
are
friendly
to
integrative
medicine,
then
the
board
will
likely
not
take
advantage
of
legal
gaps
or
loopholes
to
discipline
an
IMP’s
license.
Therefore,
a
rankings
list
may
easily
fluctuate
as
new
members
come
and
go
and
as
laws
change.
With
these
truths
in
mind,
take
the
following
rankings
with
a
grain
of
salt.

B.
Methodology

To
rank
all
50
states,
including
the
District
of
Columbia,
we
first
tallied
each
state’s
checkmarks.
The
total
possible
checkmarks
a
state
could
tally
in
all
six
categories
is
26.
The
data
was
sorted
first
according
to
the
total
number
of
checkmarks.
If
states
were
tied,
they
were
then
sub-­‐sorted
according
to
highest
tally
in
the
“Integrative
Medicine
&
Health
Freedom”
category
and
if
they
tied
again,
they
were
finally
sub-­‐sorted
according
to
the
highest
tally
from
the
individual
averages
of
the
other
five
categories.
The
total
number
of
checkmarks
is
clearly
the
most
important
number,
as
it
indicates
how
close
the
state
comes
to
our
legal
“wish
list”
for
the
states.
The
“Integrative
Medicine
&
Health
Freedom”
category
is
important
because
it
reveals
whether
or
not
that
state
has
addressed
the
practice
of
integrative
medicine
or
complementary
and
alternative
therapies.
States
addressing
and
acknowledging
integrative
medicine
and
CAM
therapies
are
more
likely
to
have
favorable
laws,
regulations,
or
policies
for
its
practice.
Finally,
without
wanting
to
discount
the
importance
of
the
other
categories,
we
averaged
these
categories
individually
and
noted
the
total
value.
The
state
rankings
list
(below)
is
the
result
of
this
analysis.

Disclaimer:
These
rankings
are
subject
to
change
with
modifications,
additions,
and
repeals
to
state
laws,
regulations,
and
policies.
These
rankings
should
not
be
relied
upon
as
legal
advice
or
as
a
complete
picture
of
the
regulatory
environment
in
your
state.
*
The
rankings
for
states
with
separate
medical
and
osteopathic
boards
were
calculated
separately.
Many
states’
medical
and
osteopathic
boards
tied
in
the
rankings
and
this
is
indicated
in
parenthesis.
However,
those
states
that
had
different
rankings
for
their
boards
appear
twice
on
the
list.
**Note
that
although
the
District
of
Columbia
ranks
near
the
bottom
of
our
list,
the
board
has
been
found
in
practice
to
dismiss
complaints
against
multiple
IMP’s
upon
submission
of
detailed
written
requests
by
their
legal
counsel.

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner





NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo




INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

12
/
8
MD,
4
Public
Every
other
month
MD



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM*
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy






*Practitioners
may
also
refer
patients
to
a
CAM
provider.
See
Arizona
Medical
Board.
The
Arizona
Medical
Board’s
Guidelines
for
Physicians
Who
Incorporate
or
Use
Complementary
or
Alternative
Medicine
in
Their
Practice.
The
use
of
chelation
therapy
for
treatment
other
than
heavy
metal
poisoning
is
considered
unprofessional
conduct
unless
the
licensee
obtains
informed
consent
and
conforms
to
experimental
procedures.
Ariz.
Rev.
Stat.
§
32-­1854(40)
(2010).

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

7
/
5
DO,
2
Public
Members
Bimonthly
DO



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

15
/
8
MD,
7
Public
Quarterly
MD

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner





NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner




THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo




INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM*
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy






*California
states
it
is
only
prudent
to
permit
alternative
and
complementary
treatments
because
it
can
take
up
to
17
years
for
the
scientific
community
to
recognize
a
new
best
practice
in
the
treatment
of
diseases.
Cal.
Bus.
&
Prof.
Code
§
2234.1(c)
(West
2010).

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

9
/
5
DO,
2
Public
Members,
2
ND
3-­‐4
times
per
year
DO

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner





NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner




THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo




INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

16
/
8
MD,
3
DO,
1
PA,
4
Public
Members
Monthly
MD,
DO,
PA



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy






*Colorado
strictly
prohibits
licensees
from
deviating
from
the
state’s
defined
scope
of
practice
for
each
profession.
Colo.
Rev.
Stat.
§
12-­‐36-­‐106(4)
(2010).
In
Colorado,
there
is
the
opportunity
to
obtain
true
peer
review
through
the
establishment
of
Professional
Review
Committees.
Colo.
Rev.
Stat.
§
12-­‐36.5-­‐104
(2010).
Colorado’s
integrative
practitioners
should
consider
forming
such
a
committee.

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)*

15
/
8
MD,
1
DO,
1
PA,
5
Public
Members
Monthly
MD,
DO,
PA

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint**
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

*Board
members
may
not
be
elected
or
professional
members
of
a
professional
society
or
association
related
to
medicine.
**Physicians
have
14
days
to
answer
a
complaint.

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner





NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service*




THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy
*Notice
for
a
hearing
must
be
given
at
least
15
days
in
advance
of
the
hearing
date.

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo*











INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

*It
may
be
permissible
to
review
a
license
revocation
order
de
novo.
State
ex
rel.
De
Gaetani
v.
Driskell,
139
Fla.
49
(1939).

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

7
/
5
DO,
2
Public
Members
Approx.
4
times
per
year
DO,
PA,
AA



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo*











INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

*It
may
be
permissible
to
review
a
license
revocation
order
de
novo.
State
ex
rel.
De
Gaetani
v.
Driskell,
139
Fla.
49
(1939).

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

27

Indiana

Medical
Licensing
Board
of
Indiana,
400
W.
Washington
St.,
Rm
W072,
Indianapolis,
IN
46204,
www.in.gov/pla/medical.htm
Note:
Complaints
in
Indiana
are
handled
by
the
Consumer
Protection
Division
of
the
Office
of
the
Attorney
General.

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

10
/
5
MD,
2
DO,
3
Public
Members
Every
6-­‐8
weeks
MD,
DO,
ACU



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner




NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

15
/
7
MD,
1
DO,
3
Citizens
at
Large
Monthly
MD,
DO,
AT,
PA,
SA,
ACU

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner




THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

9
/
6
MD,
3
Public
Members
Monthly
Allopathic
MD,
PA



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

9
/
6
DO,
3
Public
Members
Monthly
DO,
PA



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service







THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner*
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

7
/
5
MD,
2
Public
Members
Semimonthly
MD,
DO,
ACU




THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service




THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy



The
Board’s
position
on
chelation
therapy
is
that
it
may
only
be
used
for
the
treatment
of
heavy
metal
poisoning.
Any
other
use
is
considered
experimental
and
a
licensed
physician
may
use
chelation
therapy
for
an
unapproved
use
only
in
investigational
or
research
work.
See
Commonwealth
of
Massachusetts
Board
of
Registration
in
Medicine.
Chelation
Therapy
(Approved
June
13,
2001).

Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

19
/
10
MD,
1
PA
8
Public
Bimonthly
MD,
PA

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

9
/
8
MD,
1
DO
Every
other
month
MD,
DO,
DPH,
PA,
RA,
ACU

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo




INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner





NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Chelation
therapy
is
considered
of
no
medical
or
osteopathic
vlaue
except
for
the
treatment
of
heavy
metal
poisoning.
However,
the
Board
will
not
seek
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
based
solely
on
his
or
her
non-­‐approved
use
chelation
therapy
if
the
licensee
first
obtains
informed
consent
from
the
patient.
Mo.
Code.
Regs.
Ann.
tit.
20,
§
2150-­‐2.165
(2010).

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

The
Board’s
position
on
chelation
therapy
is
that
it
is
not
effective
for
the
treatment
of
cardiovascular
disease
or
any
disease
other
than
heavy
metal
poisoning.
See
Montana
Board
of
Medical
Examiners.
EDTA
Chelation
for
Cardiovascular
Disease
(April
2009).

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo





INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner





NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy






Chelation
therapy
is
prohibited
except
for
the
treatment
of
heavy
metal
poisoning
or
any
other
disease
that
the
Board
“finds
warrants
its
use.”
Nev.
Admin.
Code
§
633.340
(2010).

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

7
/
5
DO,
2
Public
Members
Monthly
DO,
PA



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner





NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

The
Board’s
position
on
chelation
therapy
is
that
it
may
only
be
used
for
the
treatment
of
heavy
metal
poisoning.
Chelation
may
be
used
in
research
to
treat
other
dieases
if
the
licensee
first
obtains
written
approval
from
the
US
Dept.
of
Health
and
Human
Services,
Office
for
Human
Research
Protection.
See
New
Hampshire
Board
of
Medicine.
Policy
on
Use
of
EDTA
(Adopted
January
7,
2004).

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

21
Monthly
MD,
DO,
DPM,
MW,
AT,
PA,
BLD,
HAD,
ELE,
PER

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

49

New
York

New
York
State
Office
of
Professional
Medical
Conduct*,
433
River
St.,
Ste
303,
Troy,
NY
12180,
www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/opmc/monthly.htm

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service







THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy



*The
New
York
State
Office
of
Professional
Medical
Conduct
investigates
all
complaints
against
licensed
physicians,
not
the
New
York
State
Board
for
Medicine.

Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)




THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service









THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

12
/
9
MD,
1
DO,
2
Public
Members
3
times
a
year
–
March,
July,
November
MD,
DO,
PA




THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

The
University
of
North
Dakota
has
a
program
in
Integrative
Medicine.
See
http://www.med.und.edu/.

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy






The
Board’s
position
on
chelation
therapy
is
that
a
licensee
may
be
in
violation
of
Ohio
law
if
he
or
she
uses
chelation
to
treat
any
disease
other
than
heavy
metal
poisoning.
To
use
chelation
therapy
for
the
treatment
of
any
other
disease,
the
licensee
must
first
obtain
approval
for
investigational
research
from
the
FDA’s
Dept.
of
Bureau
of
Drugs
&
Biologics.
See
The
State
Medical
Board
of
Ohio.
Interpretations
of
Statutes
Regarding
Chelation
Therapy
(Approved
August
1984).

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner





NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo





INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

8
/
6
DO,
2
Public
Quarterly
DO



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service



THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner





NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner





NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

12
/
4
MD,
2
DO,
5
Public
Members
1
per
month
MD,
DO



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath*
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath*
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

*Complaints
must
be
signed
and
verified
under
oath,
but
the
complainant’s
identity
is
kept
confidential.

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM*
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

The
Board
may
not
base
a
finding
of
unprofessional
conduct
solely
on
the
basis
that
a
licensee
uses
chelation
therapy.
S.D.
Codified
Laws
§
36-­‐4-­‐29
(2010).
However,
South
Dakota
law
fails
to
recognize
that
unprofessional
conduct
may
not
be
based
upon
the
licensee’s
use
of
other
complementary
and
alterative
therapies.

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

The
Board’s
position
on
chelation
therapy
is
that
it
may
only
be
used
in
a
clinical
setting
for
the
treatment
of
heavy
metal
poisoning.
Any
other
use
may
be
considered
unprofessional
conduct,
making
false
representations,
and
gross
malpractice
unless
the
licensee
first
obtains
the
Board’s
written
approval
for
a
clinical
investigation.
See
Tennessee
Board
of
Medical
Examiners.
Alternative
Medicine
or
Procedures
Without
Evidence
of
Scientifically
Proven
Benefit
that
are
Effective
and
Low
Risk
(Adopted
March
1,
2005).

Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

6
Quarterly
DO,
MW



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

19
/
19
MD,
3
DO,
7
Public
5
times
per
year
MD,
DO,
ACU,
PA,
SA

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner



THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

11
/
9
MD,
2
Public
Members
Monthly,
as
needed
MD

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

5
/
4
DO,
1
Public
Member
Quarterly
DO

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

5
/
3
DO,
2
Public
Members
Quarterly
DO



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service





THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo




INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service






THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)




THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner

NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner




THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner






NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service

THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo



INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy

THE
MEDICAL
BOARD
Board
Size
/
Composition
Board
Meeting
Frequency
Professions
Regulated
by
the
Board
Practitioner
members
of
the
board
must
be
actively
practicing
practitioners
Board
member
qualifications
prohibit
any
conflicts
of
interest
(family,
financial,
etc.)

8
/
4
MD,
1
DO,
1
PA,
2
Public
Members
3
per
year
minimum
MD,
DO,
PA



THE
COMPLAINT
Statute
of
limitations
on
complaints
Anonymous
complaints
are
prohibited
Complaints
must
be
sworn
to
under
oath
There
is
no
immunity
for
complaints
filed
with
malice
Complainant
is
encouraged
to
attempt
to
resolve
the
dispute
directly
with
the
practitioner



NOTICE
TO
PRACTITIONER
Notice
is
by
a
reasonable
service
of
process
method
Notice
includes
a
copy
of
the
complaint
Practitioner
has
at
least
15
days
after
service
of
process
to
answer
the
complaint
Notice
for
a
formal
hearing
is
not
less
than
30
days
after
the
date
of
service







THE
INVESTIGATION
Peer
review
is
conducted
by
practitioners
employing
the
same
therapies
as
the
practitioner
There
are
procedures
for
independent
expert
review
of
the
complainant’s
allegations
The
identity,
qualifications,
statements,
and
reports
of
each
expert
are
made
available
to
the
practitioner

THE
HEARING,
DECISION,
&
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
Standard
of
proof
for
disciplinary
action
against
a
licensee
is
“clear
and
convincing”
The
board
must
show
actual
harm,
or
a
high
risk
of
harm
compared
to
the
conventional
modality
Board
members
may
not
participate
if
they
have
a
conflict
of
interest
with
the
practitioner
In
finding
the
standard
of
care,
the
board
considers
CME
credits
as
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
Disciplinary
actions
must
be
proportional
to
the
practitioner’s
offense
The
board
must
strongly
consider
the
discipline
recommended
by
the
administrative
law
judge
or
panel
Dismissed
actions
are
expunged
from
the
practitioner’s
public
record
Judicial
review
is
meaningful
–
the
court
reviews
the
facts
and
law
de
novo

INTEGRATIVE
MEDICINE
&
HEALTH
FREEDOM
Unprofessional
conduct
cannot
be
based
solely
on
the
practitioner’s
use
or
incorporation
of
CAM
Practitioners
may
use
or
incorporate
CAM
Statutory
or
regulatory
language
expressing
respect
for
patient
choice
in
health
care
Informed
consent
is
considered
by
the
board
when
a
practitioner
uses
or
incorporates
a
CAM
therapy



75

Section
IV:
Where
to
Go
From
Here
A.
Learn
the
Law
and
Get
Involved
in
Your
State
The
first
steps
are
to
learn
the
law
in
your
state.
Go
online
to
your
state
medical
board’s
website
and
review
the
information
provided
there,
along
with
the
laws
and
regulations.
Next,
talk
to
other
state
practitioners
and
get
their
opinions
on
the
regulatory
environment
in
your
state.
Another
good
idea
is
to
find
out
which
attorneys
in
your
state
defend
doctors
against
medical
boards.

B.
Change
the
Law
with
the
Alliance
for
Natural
Health
USA

If
you
do
not
like
the
law
in
your
state,
work
to
change
it.
The
Federation
of
State
Medical
Boards
has
created
a
guideline
for
the
use
of
complementary
and
alternative
therapies
in
medical
practice.
Although
the
guideline
falls
short
in
some
areas,
getting
your
legislature
to
adopt
it
is
a
step
in
the
right
direction.
Contact
the
Alliance
for
Natural
Health
USA
for
information
and
resources.
We
are
here
to
help!
The
Alliance
for
Natural
Health
USA
(ANH-­‐USA)
is
part
of
an
international
organization
dedicated
to
promoting
sustainable
health
and
freedom
of
choice
in
healthcare
through
good
science
and
good
law.
We
protect
the
right
of
natural-­‐health
practitioners
to
practice
and
the
right
of
consumers
to
choose
the
healthcare
options
they
prefer.
Since
1992,
we
have
worked
to
shift
the
medical
paradigm
from
an
exclusive
focus
on
surgery,
drugs
and
other
conventional
techniques
to
an
“integrative”
approach
incorporating
food,
dietary
supplements
and
lifestyle
changes.
This
is
the
way
to
improve
health
and
extend
lives
while
reducing
the
costs
of
healthcare
back
to
a
sustainable
level.
The
Alliance
for
Natural
Health
USA
1350
Massachusetts
Ave.
NW,
5th
Floor
Washington,
D.C.
20036
www.anh-­‐usa.org
Email:
office@anh-­‐usa.org
Phone:
1.800.230.2762
76